On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 15:36:11 -0600, "Christopher A. Williams" <chriswfedora@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > If you use Fedora the expectations are that you use nouveau, that Fedora > > packagers aren't responsible for debugging packages that aren't in our repos, > > and that Fedora packagers shouldn't have to slow down development because some > > third party is dragging their feet. > > ....And no again. Those might be _your_ expectations, but they are not > _my_ expectations. And since I'm the one who gets to decide what > software I run on _my_ computer, your expectations don't apply. Oh, and > I've used and contributed to Fedora since version 1.0 (and, before that, > its Red Hat Linux predecessor since the "Halloween" release). You can run whatever you what, but when you are talking about fixing issues with nVidia on Fedora then you bring in the expectations of the people who work on Fedora not run it. For the most part the people who work on the kernel have no interest in dealing with any nVidia problems. > 1) You implied, if not almost stated outright, that I have an > expectation Fedora should fix and debug nVidia packages. That's false. I > never even remotely went there. I have an expectation that Fedora will > fix their own bugs, nVidia will fix their own bugs, and the two parties > will kindly figure out how to work together under the circumstances that > exist like adults instead of tantrum throwing children. If you are running a tainted kernel (for example using nVidia's drivers), the kernel maintainers aren't going to spend time on any problems with that configuration. If you can make the problem happen without having a tainted kernel, then it might get looked at. > ...In the meantime I'll continue to play around with and provide > feedback on Nouveau, and if it eventually suits my needs better than > nVidia, I'll switch. That may be a while yet. 3D is still buggy, and the level of OpenGL support is significantly behind what's in the closed drivers. Another aspect in the mix is nVidia's proprietary CUDA stuff. I don't think opencl support is that far along yet (though i don't follow that very closely), but you also might not have an easy time switching and nVidia seems to be trying to get lockin there. > 2) You imply and try to make the case that running Fedora means I have > to buy fully into the ultimate in "OpenSource Only" ideology. That's > also false. No, I don't have to. I can run Fedora any way I want to, in > combination with any other software I want to, as long as I follow the > applicable licenses (in Fedora's case, the GPL). No, I was providing expections on the kind of support you can expect and that if that support doesn't match your expectations another distro might be better. > I find it amazing that people who cry out loudest for OpenSource and > software choice somehow seem to be the same group to get upset when that > software choice includes a mix of FOSS and proprietary products. If you > take that position, aren't you becoming exactly what it is you are so > passionately standing up against? The issue is with support, not use. It isn't just proprietary stuff. Problems with any third party packages are really primarily the problem of the third party packager. The onus is on them to demonstrate there is a bug in a Fedora package. I do like the trend for holding published interfaces more constant throughout the lifespan of a release so that third party stuff can be used more conveniently. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
